The Reason-Rupe September 2012 poll includes our favorite ideological questions to differentiate libertarians from liberals and conservatives. Using three questions, we can define libertarians as respondents who believe “the less government the better,” who prefer the “free market” to handle problems, and who want government to “favor no particular set of values.” These fiscally conservative, socially liberal voters represent 20% of the public in the Reason-Rupe poll, in line with previous estimates.

Among these likely libertarian voters, the presidential horserace currently stands:

Romney 77%
Obama 20%
Other 3%

Romney’s share of the libertarian vote represents a high water mark for Republican presidential candidates in recent elections.

Considering these chuckleheads happily voted for Bush’s re-election in 2004 59%-38% over John Kerry despite Cowboy George getting us to some awesome wars where we dropped all kinds of liberty on people half a world away, I don’t think your definition of “libertarian” actually means what you seem to believe it should. And this year, once again, they have no intention of voting for the actual libertarian candidate.

Now, if you define “libertarian” as “Hypocritical Randian austerity-loving misery junkie war pigs” then yes, you have a point. But let’s be honest, these guys are really just plain old garden variety Country Club Repubs and have been since the Reagan years.

Self-hating Republicans, the lot of them. Just switch the faith of choice from Talibangelical to Church Of The Invisible Hand Dropping Bombs, and that’s the only difference.

Eh, the whole multi-blog Conor Friedersdorf flamewar is over the argument that antiwar Democrats are doing exactly the same thing, so I can’t feel too superior. Presumably these people’s priorities are such that they feel that Romney is the superior candidate with a chance of winning, and they’re perfectly aware that voting for Gary Johnson just gets Obama in. I can see that as rational behavior.

3) On relationships: Libertarians are the most individualistic; they report the weakest ties to other people. They score lowest of the three groups on many traits related to sociability, including extroversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. They have a morality that matches their sociability – one that emphasizes independence, rather than altruism or patriotism.

Look, we all know that the two big Libertarian goals are lower taxes for the wealthy and less government regulation of businesses. They’ll get a lot more of that from Romney than Obama, so I don’t see any real inconsistency here.

What an utter asswipe – Libertarians are NOT, and NEVER have been 20% of the voting population! No way, no how, not even close. This asshole has zero knowledge and is typical of all the stupid talking heads – make up numbers then write a post justifying the need for the falsified data – what a true thug.

It’s not clear to me whether libertarians understand the word “values”. Here’s one of the questions they ask:

Some people think the government should promote traditional values in our society. Others think the government should not favor any particular set of values. Which comes closer to your own view?

So it’s either traditional values or no particular set of values at all. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? Forget it, I guess. As for me, I’d like a government that does something to prevent people from killing or enslaving others, or generally making their lives miserable.

I dunno, these aren’t self-registered or self-identified libertarians. They’re libertarians as defined by three polling questions. Most of them are probably registered as Republicans, so it makes sense that they’d vote Republican instead of libertarian. If the Fonzi of Freedom says he’s voting for Romney then I’m perfectly comfortable piling on the criticism and mockery.

I would like to see how that voting trend was prior to 1980 (This was the year David Koch was the Libertarian Party VP pick along with Ed Clark who runs Reason Foundation)

It really strikes me as odd that self identified Progressive voters tend to vote more for citizen’s financial liberty and citizen’s social liberty in greater force.

When the individual is financially liberated from the abuses of Market Dominating corporate interests the whole nation grows wealthier. i.e. – Anti trust laws are enforced, FIRE sector regulations prevent excessive fees and rent seeking. Wages across the board increase and unions are accepted as part of the labor landscape. In other words, Financial Liberty means there is some semblance of balance between labor and capital.

Social liberty implies (to me, at least) that the state cannot define how you “pursue happiness” as long as your pursuit doesn’t impinge on other’s rights. As in, whom you can partner with, how you privately enjoy your home life…that means an end to the Drug war and the State Security apparatus that grew up around it. An acceptance of civil partnerships regardless of how your faith or religion might renounce it….

The influence of the KOCH family on the Libertarian Party values has made this voting sector little more than republican/corporate sock puppets and it’s really hurt the republic in very dangerous ways. Remember, David Koch was booted from the Libertarian party after their disastrous showing in the 1980 elections. David’s and Charles’ wild Bircher Paranoia was a major turnoff back then too….

Progressive voters are more libertarian than today’s faux Koch bought off libertarians.

People forget that just like Republicans and Democrats there are a variety of libertarians. There are those that follow the Koch brand of libertarianism that is all about the free market. There are those (very much now in the minority) that are far more concerned with civil liberties and that you can also lose your liberties under the free market.

Most “libertarians” I’ve known were just garden variety Republicans or Democrats, who just like to think they’re above all the messiness that comes with being a real party engaged in actual governance. I’ve met very, very few people who actually fulfill the “government out of my bedroom, out of my pocketbooks, out of my phone lines, everywhere” definition of libertarian. Most of them are all for big government in some places and not in others – and where they want it usually corresponds 90% or more to where one of the two existing parties wants it.

People forget that just like Republicans and Democrats there are a variety of libertarians. There are those that follow the Koch brand of libertarianism that is all about the free market. There are those (very much now in the minority) that are far more concerned with civil liberties and that you can also lose your liberties under the free market.

This. But the former way outnumber the latter.

I had a brief attraction to libertarianism in the mid-2000s after deciding I didn’t like the Republican Party, because in the era of warrantless wiretapping, torture and all that shit, an ideology based on individual rights and opposition to big government seemed like a good thing. Didn’t take me that long to realize that the only “rights” the libertarian movement gave a shit about were the rights of billionaires to go on stepping all over everyone else’s, and that if I really gave a shit about civil liberties, regular old liberalism would get me farther along that route that those pricks.

Just about everyone I know in my age cohort (gen x) calls themselves “socially liberal, fiscally conservative” Just to fuck with people I call myself socially authoritarian and fiscally profligate.

Libertarianism as a self contained ideology is dead on arrival and about as likely as maoism in american politics, but the Repubs pick and choose elements they like and that’s ace with most libertarians. Somehow they never get around to the ‘socially liberal’ part (except they’re generally cool with gay people and anti-drug-war).

Yeah, but they don’t actually put any of the effort into, say, repealing DADT or DOMA or passing gay marriage. No, they keep voting for Ron Paul and Rand Paul and trust those of us on the other side of the aisle to do all the work for them on that count.

Libertarians are socially liberal because what that means is putting each individual’s conscience before either corporate OR government/majority interests. It means treating every single person with dignity and respect, even if they disagree about something that is core to your own belief system. (Why is that person so much more hate-worthy than someone who commits an actual crime? Go figure.) Live and let live is the most social liberal policy. There will always be jerks.

I believe that I have a moral obligation to nod and smile and then politely explain why I disagree. I believe that a person is more than a single idea, or even the sum of their ideas. A person cannot be wrong. Only an idea can be wrong. People are worthy of respect and dignity EVEN WHEN I disagree with them. It makes it more likely that they will change their minds, and less likely they will pass the view on to their children. That is why my tolerance of even the most hateful views is more liberal than those of my censoring, anti-Christian, anti-South, anti-republican friends, who discriminate freely on some bases but not others.

Finally, the classical liberal thought is above all about “reason.” What that means is – utter humility about where society is going. Just because we think we know right from wrong, doesn’t mean that some of our views will be considered totally evil and backwards in the future. We must accept views that are ridiculous in order to allow for the free evolution of thought. Every human being deserves to speak, even if they do not deserve to be heard.

I am a mother. I was a Democrat up until about one year ago, I canvassed for Obama. I have been active in politics for gay rights. I also embraced the Unitarian church, which believes there are more similarities between religions than differences within them. I am the furthest from anti-social you can get – I am so bleeding heart, that I kept looking for “answers” until I found some unconventional ones.

Please do not stereotype any group of people. I believe there are civil, decent, interesting, thoughtful, moral, and social people who belong to EVERY large group of people by religion or ideology. If you don’t, look harder! You are not smarter than the smartest Republican, or kinder, or less selfish, etc.